article thumbnail

6th Circ. Won't Reverse 'Willy-Nilly' For Insurer's Advisor

Law 360

it wouldn't reverse a Michigan federal court's decision "willy-nilly" at oral arguments Thursday, when the firm sought to prevent partial reimbursement for underlying stock valuation litigation while its insurer continued to fight for total payback. A Sixth Circuit panel told investment firm Stout Risius Ross Inc.

article thumbnail

Justices to consider appropriate standard for harmless-error review of state convictions in federal habeas proceedings

SCOTUSBlog

On appeal, Davenport argued that his conviction should be reversed because of this constitutional violation, but the Michigan appellate courts determined that the error was harmless. The Michigan trial and intermediate appellate courts relied on this latter testimony to hold that the error was harmless.

Court 86
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

A search for coherence in the interplay between AEDPA and Brecht

SCOTUSBlog

Share The Supreme Court heard oral argument Tuesday in Brown v. Davenport to consider whether a Michigan prisoner, whose constitutional right to a fair trial was violated when he was visibly shackled before the jury, is entitled to habeas corpus relief. That would make the resulting state court decision unreasonable under AEDPA.

article thumbnail

In rejecting a prisoner’s post-conviction claim, court plants seeds for narrowing habeas relief

SCOTUSBlog

The answer to that question turned on the relationship between a Supreme Court decision and a congressional statute. Additionally, the majority noted, the legal materials that a court may consult when addressing the two inquiries are distinct: AEDPA requires the court to focus on U.S. In Brecht v.

Court 92
article thumbnail

Data on Choice-of-Court Clause Enforcement in US

Conflict of Laws

These courts will not, however, enforce a clause when it is unreasonable or contrary to public policy. This means that the federal courts are free to adopt their own view of whether a clause is unreasonable or contrary to public policy without considering prior state court decisions. They apply federal common law.

Court 52
article thumbnail

Arthrex on Remand: Commissioner of Patents Drew Hirshfeld and the Problem of Shadow Acting Officials

Patently O

Editors note – I invited Professor Nina Mendelson (University of Michigan Law School) to author a guest post after reading her 2020 Admin. Hirshfeld has the legal power to fulfill the expanded job as required by the Supreme Court’s decision. 1) The litigation background. — Dennis Crouch.

Statute 76
article thumbnail

They Called 911 for Help. Police and Prosecutors Used a New Junk Science to Decide They Were Liars.

The Crime Report

When agencies refused to turn over public records, ProPublica’s lawyers threatened litigation and in one case sued. He once hosted a former student from Florida at his lakeside vacation house in Michigan, where he claimed on his Facebook page that they “solved a murder.” One jumped up and down, shouting, “He’s guilty. He did it!!”.